The Protect College Sports Act is probably dead — and that’s a good thing

Football conference championships are nearly here, with the Atlantic Coast Conference, Southeastern Conference, and Big Ten Conference set to host some of the biggest games on the first Saturday in December. It could be the last season under the old system, but it likely won’t.Even though the Senate overwhelmingly passed the Protect College Sports Act, led by Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA), on Sept. 28, sending it to the House on Oct. 5, it stalled before the midterm elections, and the now lame-duck 119th Congress probably won’t take it up.In fact, asking Grok what the odds of it being acted on, the chatbot replies, “Low — roughly in the 5–15% range that the House will meaningfully take it up (and pass something that can become law) in the current Congress.” Despite its fanfare and strong bipartisan support, the bill quietly dying in the lower chamber is probably the best thing that can happen — not for Congress, but for higher education. Here’s why.The perils of federal control over athletics First of all, let’s get the parliamentary rules out of the way. If the House doesn’t take up the bill before the 120th Congress is sworn in next year, it automatically expires under Article I of the Constitution. The bill would then have to be reintroduced as new legislation, assigned a new bill number, go back through committee review, and pass both the Senate and the House again.This is a good thing because there’s little to no indication the incoming Democratic majorities have any interest in reviving old bills. Instead, they’re likely to focus solely on hearings, lawfare, subpoenas, indictments, and impeachment, along with unadulterated legislative gridlock.The SEC and Big Ten can breathe a sigh of relief because the so-called Protect College Sports Act would essentially put 535 members of Congress in charge of college athletic programs by consolidating power in new federal bureaucracies. It would also govern student-athlete compensation, while ostensibly promoting stronger state laws.Meanwhile, politically minded sports fans will have mixed emotions they’ll easily forget once the conference championship games start.However, this presents a real opportunity for universities to recapture their former respect as true institutions of higher learning and breakthrough research — two cornerstone characteristics on which colleges were built. Intertwining Congress will only be an unmitigated disaster. We know this because the ironically named Protect College Sports Act won’t solve the underlying problem plaguing the current athletic system.Why the proposed legislation misses the mark The proposed legislation will not clean up the current mess because it ignores direct revenue sharing and fails to establish a sustainable framework or mandate for athletes to share directly in the billions of dollars generated by football and basketball TV rights and ticket sales.It also maintains antiquated restrictions that prevent athletes from organizing or engaging in collective bargaining as traditional employees, keeping compensation capped rather than allowing a truly open market.What’s more, the bill won’t address the core financial power imbalance between major conferences, universities, and the players doing the work. Instead, it shields governing bodies from antitrust accountability while keeping the financial windfall concentrated at the top.So, fixing college sports requires an entirely different approach — one that doesn’t rely on congressional intervention. Universities can restructure their athletic programs to make them worthwhile ventures, not just debt-ridden departments subsidized by taxpayers, students, and their families.A sustainable blueprint for college athletics and university integrity Currently, of roughly 350-370 Division I athletic departments, only 6%-8% operate at a surplus. Conversely, the remaining 92%-94% post financial net losses, according to the Government Accountability Office.To make them profitable, universities could spin off their athletic departments into separate commercial entities, such as private tax-exempt affiliates, joint ventures, or private-equity-backed operating companies. By doing so, colleges can wall off multimillion-dollar sports-enterprise risks from their general operating budgets.This structure would subsequently treat athletics as an independent business unit responsible for its own revenue; broadcast rights; name, image, and likeness operations; and payroll-style athlete compensation, freeing university leadership and academic funds to focus entirely on core research and teaching missions.Here’s where this model gets even better: These spun-off entities act as campus-adjacent commercial laboratories, offering structured internships across multiple academic disciplines.FROM ‘WHITE PRIVILEGE’ TO ‘TRANS INCLUSION’: THE WNBA IS RELEVANT FOR ALL THE WRONG REASONSFor instance, this structure would let business and sports management majors gain hands-on experience in corporate sponsorship sales, media licensing, and venue analytics. Marketing majors could run entire advertising campaigns, while sports medicine and kinesiology students complete clinical rotations in elite athletic training, rehabilitation, and biomechanics.By turning athletics into self-sustaining business hubs, universities protect academic integrity, give students practical, career-ready workforce training, and restore their reputation as genuine institutions of higher learning.Owen E. Richason IV is a contributor to the Federalist, RealClearMarkets, RealClear Education, and is the lead writer for the St. Pete-Clearwater Sun. His work has also appeared in the Houston Chronicle, San Francisco Gate, and Tampa Bay Business Insider. Owen is the author of “S4: Students, Schools, Social Media, & Success” and “The College Merit Scholarship Appeal Guide.”